=== a16g_ is now known as ypwong | ||
=== forestpiskie is now known as Guest28422 | ||
=== Guest28422 is now known as forestpiskie | ||
sil2100 | infinity: hi! | 10:07 |
---|---|---|
sil2100 | infinity: for raring, someone proposed a fix as an SRU (LP: #1204664) which basically disables a default key combination - this key combination seemingly works only once, all subsequent other keycombination-presses of this shortcut fail - I guess it's a bit wrong for an SRU, right? | 10:10 |
ubot2` | Launchpad bug 1204664 in compiz (Ubuntu Raring) "control+super+d works just the first time running Ubuntu Unity." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1204664 | 10:10 |
=== mdeslaur_ is now known as mdeslaur | ||
tseliot | stgraber, slangasek: I've found and fixed an issue in fglrx-experimental-13. I'm about to upload a new revision for the same SRU. The diff is minimal | 12:49 |
tseliot | stgraber, slangasek: ok, uploaded and here's the diff http://paste.ubuntu.com/5981051/ | 12:55 |
rtg | cjwatson, infinity: the autopackage test failure for linux 3.11.0-2.5 appears to be bogus (closeall.op: No space left on device). Can I get it promoted ? | 15:15 |
infinity | sil2100: How is that inappropriate for an SRU? | 16:48 |
sil2100 | infinity: as it's modifying default behavior, disabling a keyboard shortcut that was in during the release | 16:51 |
infinity | sil2100: One that doesn't work? :P | 16:51 |
sil2100 | infinity: even thought it wasn't really working... ;p | 16:51 |
infinity | sil2100: Though I think I misunderstood initially. Why not just fix the bug instead of disabling it? | 16:51 |
sil2100 | infinity: someone said it was working when you used it for the first time! | 16:51 |
infinity | sil2100: It seems to work for me in saucy, so clearly, there's a fix for unity7 to make it work... | 16:52 |
sil2100 | infinity: yeah, I had a discussion with upstream after asking you the question, and I think we somehow resolved it, since there is a way of fixing it somehow from what I know | 16:52 |
sil2100 | infinity: and they'll be backporting the fix to raring | 16:52 |
infinity | sil2100: Excellent, then I'll pretend this conversation never happened. | 16:52 |
sil2100 | infinity: thanks ;) | 16:52 |
sil2100 | hehe | 16:52 |
tseliot | infinity: can you approve the new revision of fglrx-experimental-13 in precise-proposed please? diff: http://paste.ubuntu.com/5981051/ | 16:54 |
mdeslaur | so...can someone explain why squid3 has not migrated from -proposed if the excuses page says "Valid Candidate"? | 18:44 |
rbasak | mdeslaur: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_output.txt is saying migrating squid3 would make sqcwa and squid-prefetch uninstallable. | 18:58 |
rbasak | (AFAICT) | 18:59 |
mdeslaur | rbasak: ah! thanks, I didn't know that page existed | 18:59 |
rbasak | mdeslaur: is this because the "squid" transitional package has disappeared in -proposed? | 19:01 |
mdeslaur | rbasak: that seems plausible, yes | 19:02 |
mdeslaur | rbasak: are you adding it back? | 19:07 |
rbasak | mdeslaur: I wasn't planning on touching it. I wonder if Debian have intentionally removed it, and if so then perhaps Debian needs to fix packages depending on it, too? | 19:07 |
mdeslaur | rbasak: debian still has "squid" in the archive | 19:08 |
rbasak | Oh | 19:08 |
* rbasak looks | 19:09 | |
rtg | infinity, linux 3.11.0-2.5 is still lodged in proposed because of the eglibc autotest failure. Could you drop kick it into release ? | 19:10 |
infinity | rtg: Yeah, will do. I was trying to see if I could reproduce the eglibc failure first, which I seemingly can't. | 19:10 |
rtg | infinity, make a really small disk ? | 19:11 |
xnox | mdeslaur: rbasak: they may have it, but is it build by the source package? Looking at debian/control of the package in sid, it no longer builds the squid binary package. | 19:12 |
infinity | rtg: That's how to make the linux one fail. The eglibc one seems weirder. | 19:12 |
xnox | it may still be in the debian archive, however. as in debian they postpone removing the package. | 19:12 |
infinity | rtg: Anyhow, given a shove. | 19:13 |
rtg | infinity, thanks | 19:13 |
mdeslaur | xnox: nono, they have a squid _source_ package | 19:14 |
mdeslaur | xnox: which build a squid binary package | 19:14 |
mdeslaur | xnox: they have _both_ squid and squid3 | 19:14 |
rbasak | Looks like we introduced a squid transitional package in Precise as an Ubuntu delta. | 19:14 |
rbasak | And that we dropped this inadvertently in the last merge. | 19:15 |
xnox | mdeslaur: oh =( | 19:15 |
xnox | rbasak: i see. | 19:15 |
rbasak | * Dropped: | 19:15 |
rbasak | - debian/control: Dropped transitional packages from squid, no | 19:15 |
rbasak | longer required. | 19:15 |
rbasak | Maybe more intentional than inadvertent! | 19:15 |
rbasak | I'll file a bug. | 19:15 |
rbasak | jamespage, yolanda: ^^ | 19:15 |
rbasak | I filed bug 1211942 | 19:22 |
ubot2` | Launchpad bug 1211942 in squid3 (Ubuntu Saucy) "Dropped squid transitional package blocks -proposed migration" [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1211942 | 19:22 |
infinity | rbasak: Was the transitional package introduced for lucid->precise? If so, it's surely not needed anymore. | 19:29 |
infinity | rbasak: And the right answer would be to make things stop depending on it. | 19:29 |
infinity | (Not that keeping it would be wrong either) | 19:29 |
rbasak | infinity: Debian do seem to be keeping it. | 19:30 |
rbasak | infinity: it seems that we dropped it. But I suppose we could reintroduce it now that users have switched when they upgraded from lucid->precise? Is that what you're saying? | 19:31 |
rbasak | (ie. reintroduce into universe) | 19:32 |
* adconrad wonders where his co-lo server has disappeared to for the last half hour. | 19:59 | |
adconrad | rbasak: I wasn't suggesting we reintroduce squid2. That would be confusing as heck if "apt-get install squid" got you an older version on saucy than it does on precise. | 20:00 |
adconrad | rbasak: Our two options, IMO, are to carry the transitional package (so, reintroduce that), or make everything that depends on "squid" depend on squid3 instead. | 20:00 |
rbasak | adconrad: right | 20:00 |
adconrad | rbasak: Reinstroducing the transitional package seems the path of least resistance. | 20:01 |
rbasak | Agreed. I'm just not sure what the logic was to drop the transitional package in the first place, which is why I filed the bug (as both yolanda and jamespage are EOD right now) | 20:01 |
adconrad | rbasak: The logic was likely "people have done the LTS->LTS upgrade, and now we expect them to install squid3 directly", as is the case with most transitional packages. | 20:02 |
adconrad | But in the case where things still *depend* on the transitional package, dropping it is probably less sane. | 20:02 |
adconrad | rbasak: If I were you, I'd just upload to fix the bug, and not worry too much about the rationale. :P | 20:02 |
jbicha | you could just have squid3 Provides: squid now, right? | 20:04 |
adconrad | You could do that instead, yes. | 20:04 |
rbasak | As long as dependent packages don't make their Depends: versioned in the future. | 20:04 |
=== adconrad is now known as infinity | ||
cyphermox | ^ this replaces brcm-patchram-plus, which you should feel free to remove | 20:49 |
jamespage | rbasak, that is whats commonly know as a mistake | 21:03 |
jamespage | rbasak, lets get back in sync with Debian | 21:03 |
rbasak | jamespage: by reintroducing squid 2? | 21:05 |
jamespage | rbasak, oh - I see - Debian still has a squid source package | 21:06 |
jamespage | rbasak, how odd | 21:06 |
rbasak | Right | 21:06 |
jamespage | rbasak, I'd re-introduce the squid binary package in squid3 | 21:07 |
rbasak | Sounds good | 21:07 |
jamespage | rbasak, as we are skewed from Debian anyway | 21:07 |
jamespage | rbasak, needs a merge as well | 21:07 |
jamespage | ah - I see why mdeslaur was asking now! | 21:15 |
=== infinity2 is now known as infinity |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!